Quote:>Most people talk about the "monopoly" issue as being as to why anti-M$
>sentiments are so prevalent. As a programmer, this does bother me but
>a more fundamental, aesthetic consideration - Microsoft develop *
>and *technologies. They offend by sensibilities as a software
>Sure the stuff looks glitzy and is apparently "user friendly" but in terms
>software design it leaves much to be desired.
Microsoft develop a lot of technologies, some excellent (e.g. IE, COM/DCOM,
ATL), some good (e.g. NT, Office), some good enough (VB,'98), some poor
(e.g. various image editors, media managers etc.) and some evil (e.g. find
I would be interested in your fundamental software 'aesthetic'. A
philosophical approach to software design and engineering is to be
applauded, but I fear your rant doesn't extend substantially beyond the
predictable UNIX advocacy. Personally, 'vi' offends my sensibilities - so
>I think you completely miss the point with CORBA. The whole idea of CORBA
>that it allows you to develop software for a mixed-architecture system. I
>don't mean little gadgets or standalone apps. CORBA allows objects running
>on different systems to communicate. For example, you may have a database
>processing business object on your server and an application that talks to
>this business object running on a client PC. The server could be a grunty
>Alpha running UNIX and the client running Windows. You see, you are
>developing completely different code for both platforms. CORBA is the
>for binding the system, server and client, together. I don't understand
>your comment about "IFDEF junk" is relevant to the discussion - I wonder if
>you have any idea what you're talking about.
He say "I tried both a and b, and preferred b", you then gave us a trite run
down of distributed systems. I think those interested at this stage probably
new this much. The point that was originally made is that whilst COM is
essentially a proprietary technology, it has a very broad appeal and
deployment potentential. UNIX, CORBA et al are promoted as the vanguard of
'Open Systems', but historically (and still in practice) there are many
obstactles to overcome when trying to implement cross-platform solutions on
UNIX (such as binary incompatibility, proprietary extensions to the
architecture, cost etc). I am not suggesting that UNIX is not the way to go,
just that it is no more a silver bullet than Wintel.
Quote:>Umm, yeah, whatever. "nifty desktop apps" <smirk>.
You don't seem to have a great deal of respect for others opinions...
Quote:>Personally, I find the
>collection of tools bundled with just about any Linux, FreeBSD, *NIX or
>downloadable from the 'net hard to beat. Yeah, some of it's a bit
>some of it requires a bit of Makefile bashing but maybe that's why I'm a
"Personally" is the operative word here. Apart from the fact that many
"real" programmers prefer Visual Studio to Emacs and GCC, I am forced to
state the bleedin' obvious:
This business is not run for programmers. This business is not run by
I am sure that your opinion is valued and valuable, it simply may not be
shared by others (myself included).